New Push Tries to Confiscate Firearms From Felons, Mentally Ill

page: 1
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 12:03 AM
link   

New Push Tries to Confiscate Firearms From Felons, Mentally Ill


online.wsj.com

Now some officials are accelerating efforts to seize those firearms. In recent months, the sheriff of Cook County, which includes Chicago, launched a gun-confiscation program; California began adding agents assigned to take away firearms; and New York enacted a law that paves the way for such a program.
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 27-7-2013 by oldmeatwad because: (no reason given)
edit on 7/27/2013 by semperfortis because: Copy the EXACT Headline




posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 12:03 AM
link   
Ok so here it is folks - Not a future tense situation any more.
Here is a prime example of what we can continue to expect given how apathetic society is as a whole.

-------

"Officials in Illinois and California can systematically confiscate firearms because they collect more data on gun owners than most states, experts said. They merge data on who owns guns with a list of people who can't legally do so, whether because of a felony conviction, violent misdemeanor, restraining order, involuntary stay in a mental hospital or court adjudication that they are mentally unstable."

-------

Anyone care to guess how many moves away from check mate we are?
Any links to stories or threads that show an equal opposite reaction with positive outcome?






online.wsj.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by oldmeatwad
 


I need to brush up on my chess skills - seemingly we may fall upon times where it could come in handy if the situation goes pass the unstable and criminal factor.

I wonder what is going to be the tipping point; when or if the majority will stand against the legislatures. Which actually makes this thread a perfect one for the Posse Comitatus Forum.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 12:35 AM
link   
The three Amigos,poster boys for gun control.Lets see how well they take their show on the road.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 01:03 AM
link   
these are state programs. who cares. the California one has existed for a long time.

they will argue 10th amendment, and i will not argue against it...double edged sword...

do like i did and move to a state with security and sanity.


edit on 27-7-2013 by LurkingRelentlessly because: one stinkin letter



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 01:06 AM
link   
If they want my guns they had best be prepared to use theirs.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 01:18 AM
link   
reply to post by oldmeatwad
 

well, well, the 3 regions that are the most difficult to lawfully obtain a gun will likely be the same 3 to step up their gestapo techniques on their oh-so-dysfunctional societies.

isn't it interesting that those are the same regions of recent Chinese investment ?

realestate.aol.com...
Nowhere is the influx of Chinese homebuyers felt more strongly than in California, where more than half of the homes sold to foreign buyers went to Chinese nationals.
- snip -
The uptick in sales to Chinese buyers started several years ago but it has increased dramatically lately.

... or this ...

money.cnn.com...
Chinese buyers accounted for 18% of the $68.2 billion that foreigners spent on homes during the 12 months ended March 31, according to the National Association of Realtors.
- snip -
And nearly 70% of those pricey Chinese [color=amber]deals were made in all cash.
that's roughly $12 billion or $1+ billion per month, every month for the last year.
look back to 2010 and you'll see that it was a breakout year and has been steadily increasing ever since.

won't it be interesting when the tables turn and the developing 'enclaves' decide Americans aren't welcome


+14 more 
posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 02:41 AM
link   
The California program takes guns away from people not allowed to own guns in the California. Or are you suggesting it is a good idea for known felons,wife beaters, persons with restraining orders to own guns.

I often think these threads are started by agent provocateurs to make gun owners look like knuckle dragging loons.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 07:00 AM
link   
It seems it's impossible to understand the term "shall not be infringed".

Oh well.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by gariac
 


Felons and wife beaters if they wants to commit murder by using a gun California will be the best place to get illegal guns in the nation, why? because when laws are enacted to ban something it becomes a big seller in the black market and plenty of sellers out there, if things were so good in California with the moron laws they have gang violence would be none existence in the state




posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by gariac
The California program takes guns away from people not allowed to own guns in the California. Or are you suggesting it is a good idea for known felons,wife beaters, persons with restraining orders to own guns.

I often think these threads are started by agent provocateurs to make gun owners look like knuckle dragging loons.


Yep that is their number one thrust in their war on the 2nd....make proponents and defenders look deficient socially, intellectually, you name it.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Schillinger
It seems it's impossible to understand the term "shall not be infringed".

Oh well.



Years ago I thought this was all just a big misunderstanding. They just needed to understand what the constitution said. Now days I believe firmly that they want those guns because they want to put a chain around our necks. That they are run of the mill knuckle dragging authoritarian dictators.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 09:08 AM
link   
I read on another site, an article of a few guys that mysteriously died
trying to get the info out about this being the next major false flag event.
that will spark a martial law event in Chicago. The guy stated in his article
statements it will start with a gun confiscation in Chicago.

I will look for the website that posted it.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by LurkingRelentlessly
 



they will argue 10th amendment, and i will not argue against it...double edged sword...

and i will argue the 14th amendment.


No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States

www.law.cornell.edu...
i am a citizen of the U.S and a resident of a state, NOT the other way around.
edit on 27-7-2013 by Bob Sholtz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 09:40 AM
link   
Thinking this through, the states (Illinois and California) are saying that they are only going after those who should not possess firearms because they were convicted of a crime that negates their rights.

Ok.

This being the case why was the issue not dealt with a time of conviction? why are these cases delayed to the point "they" have to go after them based on permit data - seems a conflict to say they had a permit when already convicted, shouldn't prevailing law cover this? to wit, a felon found with firearms should have parole revoked and serve entire sentence.

Something is fishy with this story, I can only speculate they are using these people as practice for wider confiscation efforts down the road as well as an attempt to appear to be doing something to their zombie like voters when in truth it is their very system that's failed in the first place.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 10:02 AM
link   
I don't really see how this is a problem. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for gun ownership, but I don't think people with a criminal record or mentally ill people should posses firearms.

Here in Canada if you have a criminal history that involves violence and/or drug related crimes, you are denied a license. Same goes with people who are diagnosed with a mental illness. Rightfully so in my opinion. I don't want violent criminals or mental people having the ability to buy firearms. That's just unsettling.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Xaphan
 


I agree, is nothing wrong with taking guns off the hands of felons or other people that due to mental instability should not own guns.

But the problem is that if you read all the anti gun rhetoric and proposed laws, nowhere do you will find how the government will used his power to go after the illegal gun trafficking, a law abiding citizen will get his gun by legal means, get license and subscribe his gun with the state, but when you have trafficking of illegal guns anybody can get them if you pay for the price, that is the problem, sadly the laws that are trying to pass in the states and even the federal government are targeting law abiding citizens not the tugs and criminals that will always find a gun in the streets that is what they are trying to sell.

For some reason the government is more afraid about legal law abiding citizens rights than that of criminals.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Erm what wrong with takeing guns from felons?

I mean they are felons not like those guns will be used for good purposes right?

As far as menatly ill? Well depends on whats classed as menatly ? If it just cause you once had depression then no you should still be able to own a gun. If you have voices in you head telling you to kill everyone then yeah no gun.
edit on 27-7-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by crazyewok
 


Because treating people who went to jail, did their time and are free now, as second class citizens is stupid. It's like a caste system, I do not find that acceptable.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by oldmeatwad

Ok so here it is folks - Not a future tense situation any more.
Here is a prime example of what we can continue to expect given how apathetic society is as a whole.

-------

"Officials in Illinois and California can systematically confiscate firearms because they collect more data on gun owners than most states, experts said. They merge data on who owns guns with a list of people who can't legally do so, whether because of a felony conviction, violent misdemeanor, restraining order, involuntary stay in a mental hospital or court adjudication that they are mentally unstable."

-------

Anyone care to guess how many moves away from check mate we are?
Any links to stories or threads that show an equal opposite reaction with positive outcome?

online.wsj.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


I am not necessarily against this because its state action rather than federal action. A lot depends on the details of what is going on. How far they want to go and if what they claim is actually true or not.

Taking the second amendment of the constitution literally ALLOWS gun control, Some people just dont want to accept it. On the other hand the control freaks want UK style laws that ban 80% of all available weapons. I am a middle of the road kind of guy. I think guns SHOULD be regulated to some degree. People with serious mental issues and felons do NOT deserve them, period.





top topics
 
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join